[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 6 (Wednesday, January 26, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S555-S557]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     ATTORNEY GENERAL JOHN ASHCROFT

  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, this morning, on a party-line vote, the 
Judiciary Committee agreed to send the nomination for the U.S. Attorney 
General of Judge Alberto Gonzales to the Senate floor. It is the 
leader's intention, as I understand it, to bring that nomination to the 
floor next week. So it appears to me relatively obvious that the United 
States of America will have a new Attorney General within the next 
couple of weeks.
  I did not want the opportunity to pass to talk a little bit about the 
current Attorney General, a person for whom I have absolute respect and 
express appreciation for his service, not only for the State of 
Missouri when he represented that State as Governor and later as a 
Senator but for all of America during his service in the last 4 years 
as Attorney General of the United States.
  I think sometimes people have overlooked the record of this Attorney 
General. I wanted to take a moment this evening to talk about some of 
the accomplishments of the Bush administration, and specifically the 
Justice Department under the leadership of Attorney General John 
Ashcroft. But first I want to say a couple of personal words about John 
Ashcroft.
  When his confirmation hearing was held 4 years ago, there was 
opposition to him because he was deemed to be a conservative. His views 
were deemed to be too firmly held. Some people called him rigid in his 
ideology. Some people thought he was too faithful to his religion. No 
one questioned his intelligence or his integrity or his experience.
  He is a graduate of one of the finest law schools in the country, the 
University of Chicago. He clearly had the public service, as a Governor 
of the State and as a U.S. Senator. Very few attorneys general had the 
same kind of experience he had.
  But throughout his tenure, I think he has been criticized less for 
what he has accomplished than for the kind of person he is. It ought to 
be the other way around. People should look at the kind of leadership 
John Ashcroft has provided the Justice Department and be thankful that 
we had such a firm, intelligent, upright, faithful, and strong Attorney 
General. These years have called for strength which we could not have 
anticipated when John Ashcroft was confirmed just 4 years ago. But 
because just a few months later this country was brutally attacked in 
September of 2001, all of our public servants had to begin to operate 
their departments in a way they had never operated them before.
  The Justice Department was no different. In fact, the Justice 
Department was on the front line of our defense of the homeland. There 
was no Homeland Security Department at that time. Immediately, the 
Justice Department had to begin changing the way it did business. The 
FBI, under the jurisdiction of the Justice Department, had major 
changes. Thankfully, under the leadership of John Ashcroft and now Bob 
Mueller, the Director of the FBI, things have begun to change, but it 
has not been easy. Without the strong and firm and steady leadership of 
John Ashcroft, it would likely not have happened.
  The first obligation, therefore, of the Attorney General was and is 
the protection of Americans, preventing another terrorist attack, and 
ensuring that we maintain the proper balance between the protection of 
our own civil rights and our security from terrorist attack. During the 
period of time John Ashcroft has served, we have shut down numerous 
terrorist operations and cells across America. In fact, I am informed 
the Justice Department has brought criminal charges against 364 
individuals and obtained convictions against 193 of them. Over $2 
million in funds has been frozen.
  I know, because I have talked to Attorney General Ashcroft and 
foreign leaders, he has been able to forge a relationship with his 
counterparts in other countries. For example, not to be exclusive, but 
our European allies helped us go after terrorist cells in countries 
around the world. Largely because of his success in that, we have been 
able to integrate our law enforcement activities with other countries. 
Even though people may be concerned about the support that some of our 
allies have failed to give us in operations such as those in Iraq, I 
can tell you the cooperation in law enforcement and going after 
terrorists and terrorist cells has been very good. That is one of the 
good news stories in the war on terror, and John Ashcroft had a lot to 
do with that.

  With regard to the first obligation that the Attorney General has to 
the American people, I can't think of a better person to have in place 
after 9/11 than John Ashcroft. His Department has done a terrific job.
  One of the areas that is of most concern to me is violent crime. For 
years, Senator Feinstein and I labored to secure passage of a 
constitutional amendment to protect the victims of

[[Page S556]]

violent crime. No one was more supportive of that effort than Attorney 
General John Ashcroft. In fact, President Bush came to the Justice 
Department and, with Attorney General Ashcroft and John Gillis, who 
heads the Department of Justice office in charge of supporting victims 
of crime, they made very strong and passionate statements in support of 
our amendment to protect crime victims.
  Eventually we were able, this year, to get passed not a 
constitutional amendment but a Federal law that has been signed into 
law to protect the rights of people in the Federal court system who 
were victims of crime, with significant incentives for the same 
protections to exist in the State courts. John Ashcroft was very 
supportive of those efforts. I express my great appreciation to him for 
that.
  But he has not only worked to help the victims of crime, he has 
helped to reduce crime itself. There are some interesting statistics 
here from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The rate of violent crime 
is at a historic 30-year low. In the past 3 years, the overall rate of 
violent crime has declined 27 percent from the previous 3-year period. 
Over the past 3 years, there has been a double-digit reduction in the 
rate of rape and sexual assault, a 31-percent reduction; robbery, 31 
percent; assault, 26-percent reduction. Obviously, these are not just 
statistics, these are real people whom we have ensured are not 
victimized who otherwise might have been victimized.
  Mr. President, 1.7 million fewer citizens in America have experienced 
the pain of violent crime in this period between 2001 and 2003. That is 
not all attributable to the work of the Department of Justice or 
Attorney General Ashcroft, but a lot of it is. It has been overlooked, 
and I think he deserves credit for that.
  Gun crime is something else he pledged to work on as Attorney 
General, and he kept his pledge. The Justice Department has increased 
Federal gun crime prosecutions by 68 percent over the past 3 years. In 
the fiscal year 2003, more than 13,000 offenders were charged, which is 
the highest figure for any single year. More than 9,500 individuals 
were convicted, which is the largest number ever convicted in the 
Federal system in a single year. This has been a priority. As a result, 
there have been fewer gun crimes committed.
  On illegal drugs, something we all are concerned about, working with 
John Walters, the so-called drug czar, the Drug Enforcement Agency, the 
Department of Justice, and Attorney General Ashcroft have been very 
committed to going after all of the various aspects of the illegal use 
of drugs in the United States as well as their importation into the 
country. There have been a variety of operations, but just to cite an 
overall statistic, in the past 2 years, 15 major drug-trafficking 
organizations have been dismantled or disrupted. The statistics on all 
of the major drugs, from marijuana to the hallucinogens to Ecstasy, 
LSD, show the use of drugs is falling. Part of that will be the result 
of the significant efforts of the Department of Justice.

  We were shocked to see corporate fraud raise its ugly head in this 
country a couple of years ago, and the Department of Justice went after 
that with a vengeance. The corporate scandals that had festered for 
some time were finally brought to light after 2001. As a result of the 
work of the Corporate Fraud Task Force that the President created, with 
tough investigation by our prosecutors, the Department of Justice 
brought more than 900 violators being charged in more than 400 cases. 
Over 500 individuals have been convicted or pled guilty since that 
time, including top executives at companies like WorldCom, Enron, 
Mclone, and others.
  Why is this important? America has to lead the world in terms of 
respect for the rule of law and transparency and integrity. This is 
part of what we believe to be the fundamentals of free government. It 
is important for the administration and especially the Department of 
Justice to show that it is committed to ensure that this transparency 
and integrity remains as a hallmark of our economic system. Therefore, 
the Corporate Fraud Task Force in its work was critical to achieving 
that goal.
  In the other areas for which the Department of Justice has 
responsibility, from civil rights to civil fraud to environmental 
enforcement, in each of these areas there have been significant 
achievements. One statistic: In the area of civil rights, in the past 3 
years, 439 people have been charged with criminal civil rights 
violations, which is more than during the preceding 3 years. Civil 
fraud recoveries doubled for the past 3 years.
  By the way, the number is pretty astonishing--$5 billion.
  In environmental enforcement, there have been a variety of actions. 
The Department of Justice obtained the largest civil penalty in history 
against a single company for violation of an environmental statute.
  There is so much more one could say about the Department of Justice 
under John Ashcroft's leadership. The point I want to simply make this 
evening as we are preparing to begin a new administration--a second 
Bush administration with new leadership in the Department of Justice--
is I think we should reflect a little bit on the achievements of this 
past 4 years and on the individual who helped to achieve these results.
  As a former colleague of all of us in the Senate, I know we wished 
John Ashcroft well when he took his oath of office. Although not all of 
us have agreed with every action of the Department of Justice since 
then, I think we have to agree that John Ashcroft's integrity and 
commitment were hallmarks of his leadership of the Department of 
Justice. I for one appreciate the personal commitment that he made. 
Throughout his term, I spent time with John and his family. I know how 
hard he worked in his job. America has had no more faithful servant. 
The President has had no more faithful servant in the execution of the 
policies of the administration than Attorney General John Ashcroft. He 
put his heart and soul into the job. He committed 4 years of his life 
to continuing to serve the people of this country.
  I think for that, and for the great success that his Department 
achieved, we owe him a debt of gratitude. As we begin this next 
administration, as we confirm people to serve in the next 
administration, I hope we will also pause to thank those who have 
served in the first Bush administration--all of the American people--
and say our hat is off to them, and to say Godspeed, we wish you the 
very best in the future. Take a little time off so you can reflect a 
little bit not only on what you did but on what you will need to do now 
to spend time with family and friends and enjoy the thanks that we are 
now sharing.
  I know my colleagues join me in wishing Attorney General Ashcroft 
well. And perhaps some will have more to say about his service in the 
past, but I didn't want this opportunity to pass, because he has been 
truly one of the great public servants to serve this country. I will 
personally miss him in that position, and I personally wish him well.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today, as I did in the Foreign Relations 
Committee, I cast my vote in favor of the confirmation of Dr. Rice to 
be Secretary of State. I did so not because I endorse Dr. Rice's views 
but because, barring serious concerns about a nominee's qualifications 
or serious ethical lapses, the President has the right to appoint 
Cabinet officers who share his ideology and his perspective. In keeping 
with Senate practices and precedents, my inclination is to give the 
President--any President--substantial deference in his Cabinet choices. 
I do not agree with many of the President's foreign policy choices. But 
as President, he generally has a right to a Cabinet that shares his 
perspective and agenda.
  However, I want to be clear that I was troubled by some of Dr. Rice's 
statements in the hearing. Our most senior diplomat, our emissary to 
the entire world, should be able to represent our core values. Dr. 
Rice's failure, and the failure of the administration, to categorically 
reject tactics

[[Page S557]]

that the average American would acknowledge to be torture is more than 
disappointing. It is dangerous, and it is shameful.
  I also want to restate my view that the President's foreign policy 
over the last 4 years has been, on many fronts, misguided and self-
defeating. I have discussed these issues in much greater detail on the 
Senate floor and in the Foreign Relations Committee. I am troubled by 
the damage done to our image around the world, I am concerned by our 
loss of focus in fighting terrorism, I am angry about the use of 
shifting justifications and faulty information to sell the war in Iraq, 
I am angry about the failure to plan for the fact that overthrowing a 
regime leads to disorder and disorder leads to looting, I am angry 
about the official insistence on grossly underestimating the bill that 
would be handed to the American taxpayer and then declining to budget 
for this massive expense once its parameters became more clear, I am 
angry about the mismanagement of efforts to put a competent Iraqi 
security force in place, I am angry about the woefully slow pace of 
reconstruction, and I am angry about this administration's failure to 
ensure that our troops were adequately equipped for the circumstances 
in which they found themselves. Many people in this country and in this 
Congress are troubled not only by the mistakes, but by the fact that 
there appears to be no real accountability for these failures.
  At one point in the course of the hearing, Dr. Rice expressed some 
indignation regarding questions or remarks that she felt impugned her 
credibility. Her credibility is a legitimate question. Dr. Rice made 
sweeping, public characterizations about aluminum tubes sought by Iraq 
before the war began that were, quite plainly, misleading. She 
permitted a reference to Iraq seeking uranium from Africa, a reference 
that she knew the intelligence did not support, to be included in a 
major presidential address. She has a credibility problem, not just 
among skeptics in this country, but around the world. Once confirmed, 
Dr. Rice will be accountable to Congress in a way that she was not as 
the President's National Security Advisor. I hope that Dr. Rice fully 
understands her obligations to tell the duly elected representatives of 
the American people the whole truth.
  President Bush, like any President, is entitled to a Cabinet that 
reflects his views. But I will continue to oppose every bad policy, to 
question every baseless assertion, and to advocate for a wiser course 
that will make our country more secure. The stakes for the current and 
future generations of Americans are far too high to do anything else.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I want to detail for the Senate the 
reasons why I voted to support the nomination of Condoleeza Rice to be 
our Nation's next Secretary of State. Her diverse professional 
background as a Professor at Stanford University specializing in 
Russian affairs, her time as President Bush's National Security 
Advisor, and her demonstrated understanding of world affairs and 
diplomacy qualify her to run the Department of State.
  My support for Dr. Rice does not come without reservations about the 
direction this administration has taken with regard to foreign policy. 
We confront an enormous responsibility with respect to world affairs. 
The individual charged with the running of the State Department will 
set the direction for our country's policies around the world. This 
person will have the power to decide whether to nurture and develop, or 
halt our Nation's great diplomatic efforts.
  I hope Dr. Rice works to promote democracy throughout the world, not 
just by employing our ample military force, but that we seek to develop 
democracy organically, where it has not taken hold. Democracies will be 
more receptive to our products, ideas and people, and our Nation should 
approach its foreign policy decisions with these long-term goals in 
mind. My State of Washington is heavily reliant on international trade, 
and we also create and circulate information in this age of high 
technology, which should be a principal part of our foreign policy 
strategy.
  The Senate does not, by confirming Dr. Rice, place the responsibility 
for this country's diplomacy in the hands of a single individual. I do 
not believe that the American people are ready to ignore the voices of 
our humanitarian community who remind us how fragile and vulnerable our 
international relationship can be. I am hopeful that these voices will 
be heard by Dr. Rice. I am placing my trust in her that she will 
embrace her duty to take into account the future and foreseeable 
consequences of her actions, and that she will be guided by the 
knowledge that this Senator will raise those consequences at all 
appropriate occasions.

                          ____________________